Hi Stefan,
that's a fantastic offer!
The jury is still out on the choice of DVCS, but I hope we finalize it soon
and we can put your server (and plenty of bandwidth!) to good use.
Thanks
Tom
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> On Saturday 19 September 2009 21:29:27 Tom P
On Saturday 19 September 2009 21:29:27 Tom P wrote:
> But if bandwidth becomes a problem, we could provide read-only clones of
> the fgdata repository.
> git://source1.flightgear.org/fgdata
> git://source2.flightgear.org/fgdata
> ..
> which pull automatically from the main repo.
> In fa
Hi
I've talked about the FG data repository to Johan, the main guy behind
gitorious, and in his own words:
"Diskspace in itself isn't so bad, it's really more about the
bandwidth. How active do you think the repository ends up being? "
It's difficult to come up with such an estimate.
Any idea?
B
On Friday 18 Sep 2009 7:26:12 pm Curtis Olson wrote:
> Github wrote us back saying: "Git doesn't work very well with large amounts
> of binary assets". They didn't offer further explanation to where the
> problems might be? Maybe they were just putting the brakes on and didn't
> want to offer to
Ah ok, I didn't realize it is aimed at machine code only.
Erik
Nicolas Quijano wrote:
> binary data != binary code.
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Alex Perry If they have, it won't help us. We're not distributing blobs of x86
> machine code.
---
binary data != binary code.
Binary data is ALL the images files included in aircraft, possibly some
models format supported by OSG (like .ive), all sound files, that sort of
thing.
CVS is notoriously bad at handling these files, and very inefficient at
doing so.
I believe that's what Erik meant.
Ch
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Erik Hofman wrote:
> One thing I have been wondering since this discussion started; Google
> seems to have found a nice way to add small diffs for binary data[1].
> Maybe they have incorporated that into their repository?
If they have, it won't help us. We're not
AJ MacLeod wrote:
> On Friday 18 September 2009 14:56:12 Curtis Olson wrote:
>
>> Github wrote us back saying: "Git doesn't work very well with large amounts
>> of binary assets". They didn't offer further explanation to where the
>> problems might be? Maybe they were just putting the brakes o
On Friday 18 September 2009 14:56:12 Curtis Olson wrote:
> Github wrote us back saying: "Git doesn't work very well with large amounts
> of binary assets". They didn't offer further explanation to where the
> problems might be? Maybe they were just putting the brakes on and didn't
> want to offer
Hi Tim,
The big hang up in the investigation has been the size of our data package.
If we can find one of these established places that is willing to host a
couple Gb size project, then the source will fall into place quite easily.
That was one potential advantage to code.google.com ... we have a
By way of experimentation, and to move the discussion about source control
forward, I've put git
repositories for FlightGear and SimGear up at http://gitorious.org/fg. These
are somewhat special
in that they include all the history of the project back to 1997, as
reconstructed from the
historica
11 matches
Mail list logo